Well i just traded my Trusty 5D and a Zeiss 35f2 ZE for a Canon 1DsII.My main reason for doing so was to get larger file size for stock purposes.So i am looking to rearrange my gear a bit and just seeing if anyone has some advice or input that i have not considered.
Current lenses :
Zeiss 100MP ZE - i love this lens and would have a hard time letting it go, at the same time i have $1600 invested in it.
Minolta Rokkor 58 f1.2 (EOS Converted) - Currently for sale on the Buy and Sell for $600
My thinking was : keep the Zeiss 100MP mainly because it is awesome and likely if i trade it i will never be able to manage the funds again to buy it.Sell the Rokkor to fund a C/Y 50f1.4MMJ and a Rokinon 14 f2.8 for a decent wide angle.
My only nagging thought is should i pick up a AF lens to take advantage of the fast, accurate focus of the 1DsII and see if all the focus points will make it easier to get the composition that i want but have found difficult to achieve with AF lenses.
I think you'll be happy with the 1ds2. I never really used the AF on mine when I had it so I can't really comment. Manual focusing accuracy was extremely good and that's pretty much how I used mine for approx 98% of the work I did with it. If it had Live View I'd still have it as I often shoot at night where focusing is extremely difficult and Live View trumps all.
14mm is crazy wide on full frame. If that's really what you want (including the huge gap between 14mm and 50mm), then the Rokinon is probably an excellent choice; however, I think it might be hard to find enough applications that really need this. A longer focal length and panorama stitching can cover most of the rare occasions when you really do want the extra field of view.
I'd consider a CY35-70 to cover the mid range still/lanscape uses; for stopped-down work, it combines just about the best 35mm and 50mm lenses money can buy with a perfectly decent 70mm and good close focus capability.
The Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/etc 85/1.4 makes a great portrait and mid-distance landscape lens when wide aperture, shallow-DOF images are needed. Also good for low light / nighttime shots.
A CY28/2.8 is a solid performer for a wider angle landscape lens at a reasonably low price. An Oly 24/2.8 will be even cheaper, and have more uniform corner-to-corner resolution at the cost of lower peak center resolution and contrast "impact."
Jim,
The 1Ds MkII is a remarkable camera. However, its weak point for shooting MF is no live-view. Which is why I finally broke down and bought a 5D II. (I still prefer the IQ of the 1DsMkII).
Shooting the Rokinon 14 with its massive DOF is a no brainer if you shoot hyper-focus. However, trying to go close focus with the 14 on the 1D MkII is absolutely impossible.
Looking at my 2011 pics my most used lens by far was the Canon 28-70 f/2.8, which is a very sharp zoom with good color rendition. In my opinion a better lens than the current 24-70 f/2.8. My second most used (non-telephoto) lens on that body was the 21 ZE. Those two are a match made in heaven! Also the 135mm f/2 is a great portrait lens with that camera - but then again you already have the 100 ZE. I used the C/Y Z 80-200 f/4 with very good success on keepers. And I have found the CYZ 80-200 to be a great portrait lens - especially on the 200 side.
I also have the 58 1.2 and would not even try it on that camera - which makes me think the C/Y Z 50f1.4 may not be much better. You would be better off with the ZE.
Otherwise that body did see a lot of time on the 500 f/4.
If you feel you want a nice AF lens to take advantage of the 1 series AF system, the Sigma 50/1.4 is pretty nice if you can get one that focuses accurately.
I'd sell the Zeiss (heresy, I know) and pick up a used 135L and C/Y 100/2.8 Mac. Then you'll have a better portrait lens that is every bit as center sharp as the Zeiss wide open, and corner-to-corner stunning stopped down as far as f/16 on the DsII with no noticeable diffraction on prints up to 17x22 (maybe larger). AF is nearly instant and accurate. As MF with AF lenses goes, the 135L is actually not bad, about as good as the 200/2.8 or 50/35Ls. I used it for portraits, headshots, theater, concerts, ice and in-line hockey, landscapes and panos. Adding the C/Y 100 gets you a much better macro lens that's also a decent short tele with plenty of Zeissiness.
It's not that I don't understand how difficult it would be to let go of the MP. It's a special lens. But the 135L is equally special, and on that big DsII body balances so well it feels as though they were made for each other.
Jim Schemel wrote:
My thinking was : keep the Zeiss 100MP mainly because it is awesome and likely if i trade it i will never be able to manage the funds again to buy it.Sell the Rokkor to fund a C/Y 50f1.4MMJ and a Rokinon 14 f2.8 for a decent wide angle.
My only nagging thought is should i pick up a AF lens to take advantage of the fast, accurate focus of the 1DsII ...
Congrats on the purchase: I aim to upgrade shortly. My current 1Ds is indeed snappy and accurate across its 45 focus points, but I seldom use my EF lenses. While slower, alt primes are worth the trouble. I have three 100mm C/Y lenses and, frankly, the economy Sonnar 100/3.5 is my fav. The P50/1.4 is fine, although the lowly $15 Yashica 50/2 ML could serve you just as well (see examples by CampX on the Yashica thread). If you intend to spend a lot of time in UWA territory, perhaps the mighty D21 is where you need to invest. Otherwise, the Yashica 24/2.8 ML or CZ D28/2.8 are no-brainers. 14mm on FF sounds pretty far out...
freaklikeme wrote:
I'd sell the Zeiss (heresy, I know) and pick up a used 135L and C/Y 100/2.8 Mac. Then you'll have a better portrait lens that is every bit as center sharp as the Zeiss wide open, and corner-to-corner stunning stopped down as far as f/16 on the DsII with no noticeable diffraction on prints up to 17x22 (maybe larger). AF is nearly instant and accurate. As MF with AF lenses goes, the 135L is actually not bad, about as good as the 200/2.8 or 50/35Ls. I used it for portraits, headshots, theater, concerts, ice and in-line hockey, landscapes and panos. Adding the C/Y 100 gets you a much better macro lens that's also a decent short tele with plenty of Zeissiness.
It's not that I don't understand how difficult it would be to let go of the MP. It's a special lens. But the 135L is equally special, and on that big DsII body balances so well it feels as though they were made for each other....Show more →
This is actually a very good suggestion, how good is the Canon at infinity stopped down?
-Jim
Jim Schemel wrote:
This is actually a very good suggestion, how good is the Canon at infinity stopped down?
Denoir/Luka has said some things about that and posted a comparison between the 135L and the Leica Elmarit-M 90/2.8 (in a thread about Lofoten). From what I remember, the 135L was sharp at infinity, but bland compared to the Leica (which had more CA but better color separation). I wouldn't expect the 135L to perform like ZE100/2 at infinity. Few lenses come close, I think.
The Contax Makro-Planar 100/2.8 is great at inifinity, but it's a bit heavier and bigger than the ZE (but it does 1:1 instead of 1:2). Not a very suitable as a portrait lens though (unlike the 135L).
It's an awesome lens and you do nice things with it. While the 135L was one of my favorite canon lenses, it's no zeiss MP.
If you don't really need the AF, you'll regret it.
When resolution is the main reason for the switch, I find it a bit strange that you chose the 1dsII. Did you consider a 5DII? More resolution, liveview, not as bulky, better larger LCD,...
It's an awesome lens and you do nice things with it. While the 135L was one of my favorite canon lenses, it's no zeiss MP.
If you don't really need the AF, you'll regret it.
When resolution is the main reason for the switch, I find it a bit strange that you chose the 1dsII. Did you consider a 5DII? More resolution, liveview, not as bulky, better larger LCD,...
Agree - Could not get anyone to trade for my 5D / Zeiss 35/2 for a 5DII , but someone was willing to trade a 1DsII for the above mentioned combo
I love the 85 1.8 on my 1ds2 for portraits. Beautiful, and much quicker focussing than me on my M9, which works fine when I'm doing static or studio stuff [probably], but as soon as the model moves on a low-light location shoot I'm in trouble...
It must be tempting to try AF of 1dsII. But I wouldn't do it at expense of selling a lens that I absolutely adore. I guess EF85/1.8 or EF100/2 are perfect contenders to try that AF to see how you like it that won't brake the bank.
Of wider affordable MF lenses I can recommend already mentioned Yashica ML 50/2 for its special rendering and Oly 28/3.5 for stopped down corner to corner performance.
A digression: I am interested in your experience with higher iso performance against 5D. Are there any banding issues? How do you like files overall?
I have three 100mm C/Y lenses and, frankly, the economy Sonnar 100/3.5 is my fav. The P50/1.4 is fine, although the lowly $15 Yashica 50/2 ML could serve you just as well (see examples by CampX on the Yashica thread). If you intend to spend a lot of time in UWA territory, perhaps the mighty D21 is where you need to invest. Otherwise, the Yashica 24/2.8 ML or CZ D28/2.8 are no-brainers. 14mm on FF sounds pretty far out...